Manu: I don't think it was recursion
... I'm processing things in a completely different way
... had no problems until step 9
... there are some steps that we might not need
... logically some of the other things make some of the checks redundant
... but nothing major that I see
... Mark did note xml:lang / lang question

Ben: something deeper
... there was something uncovered in direct translation of the spec to
code

Ralph: but don't take our word for it here :)
make sure you agree that the spec is unambiguous on this question

Manu: again, only the XHTML and SPARQL are what
we're evaluating

Ben, Ralph: SPARQL looks like what we'd
expect

-- test 79; @resource and @href in completing incomplete
triples

Ben: typo in the SPARQL "foaf:knows"
... same typo in test 78
... also, expand the nsprefix to full URIs

Shane: another typo; "http://http://"

Ben: also ';' should be ','

Manu: if we've use foaf:@@ in any existing
tests they should fail and there's a flag for that, so we'll catch errors
soon

-- test 80; @about overrides @resoruce in incomplete
triples

Manu: same typos 'foaf knows', same nsprefix
issue

Ben: is this the best title?

Ralph: is "@about sets subject" better?

Ben: "@about sets object"

Ralph: :)

Manu: also tests hanging @rel

<Ralph> perhaps "@about sets object for
hanging @rel"

Ben: consider what else happens if additional
markup is inside the P
... not sure if we have consistent views on this
... I think the @resource traverses down the tree
... but it's an edge case and we should defer this

-- test 81; multiple ways of handling incomplete triples
(with @rev)

Ben: your parser is doing really well if it
passes test 81

Manu: again, use full URIs not PREFIX

Ben: anyone who actually _uses_ this markup has
a twisted mind :)
... 81 looks good to me

Manu: thanks to Ivan for making these up
... typo; first triple should end in '.', not ';'
... missing predicate
... in second triple

Ben: 82 looks good, with typos corrected

-- test 83; multiple ways of handling incomplete triples
(merged)

Ben: 83 looks good with same typo fixes
... is test 78 with the bnodes named

-- test 84; multiple ways of handling incomplete triples,
this time with both @rel and @rev

Ben: appears to be the same as 82; probably
meant to be different
... probably the second node was meant to be named, like 83
... add @about to second node
... [as I'm out next week], I'll look at tests 85 - 88 offline and mail
comments

Schedule

Ben: reminder, regrets for next week -- both
SWD WG and RDFa calls
... regrets for 14-Feb and 21-Feb